The Homosexual Challenge

Before you get carried away, this is not a challenge to commit homosexual acts!

Rather, here is a challenge to those who would like to oppose Christian support for heterosexual behavior.  Christians, quite rightly, oppose the sanctioning of homosexual behavior by the government of the UK – or any other country.  People who are in favor of such behavior oppose the opposition supplied by Christians.

Why are these two groups opposed to one another?  Is either of them correct?

I am of the opinion that homosexual behavior should not be condoned by the government.  People who argue that it should be approved of by the government – and by other people – argue from the basis of the right of people to engage in homosexual behavior as an expression of their sexuality.  This is seen as a fundamental right because it is connected to their identity.  This is precisely where the challenge lies.

Here, then, is my challenge to people who are in favor of homosexual activity:

  • First, can you supply any evidence which demonstrates homosexual activity as something other than a personal, moral choice?
  • Second, can you demonstrate why the moral choices of some people who choose to commit homosexual acts should not be subject to criticism and/or restriction by other people who think such acts are a violation of sound morality?

This is a simple challenge in that it only has two components.  However, it is not simple in that it implies an awful lot of things. In order to be fair, I will give you some of my own assumptions about the challenge.

Here are a few of my own assumptions:

  • I assume that there is no sense in which homosexuality can be said to be a “condition” which removes the element of the personal choice to accept or express homosexual desires.
  • I assume that the data which shows homosexual behavior to be more dangerous than heterosexual behavior is relevant to the conversation.  This data shows numerous physical, emotional and relational dangers which arise from homosexual behavior.
  • I assume that government policy which is interested in promoting health and morality can make judgments about the sexual behavior of citizens.

Aside from beginning from a Christian worldview which most definitely rejects homosexual behavior as a good moral choice, I do not make too many more assumptions.

Let me say one final thing very clearly:

I have never knowingly been directly harsh, mean or disrespectful to any person who practices homosexual behavior.  I do not condone or advocate treating people in a way which devalues their God-given worth.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “The Homosexual Challenge

Add yours

  1. Can I demonstrate that homosexuality is anything other than a person moral choice? Heck you can do it yourself (if we’re talking orientation rather than action). For something to be a choice there must be two options, all you need to do is ask yourself when you decided to stop being attracted to guys and you have your answer.

    As a fan of freedom of speech I would never suggest that certain things cannot be criticised. I find the speech of the anti-gay crowd to be wonderful in demonstrating their lack of understanding of sexuality as a whole and damaging to their credibility to speak on moral matters in this regard (and quite possibly others too).

    1. Hello,

      Thanks for the comment!

      One thing which we differ on is the existence of “homosexual orientation.” Can you explain to me what “homosexual orientation” actually is?

      I think it is unhelpful to assume there is in fact such a thing. There is, surely, such a thing as homosexual desire. Desire is perhaps not the same thing as orientation. The broader point is that people choose to commit homosexual acts. Even given a set of homosexual desires, a person does not have to ac on those desires.

      As a parallel, I am quite sure most, if not all, of my desires have been heterosexual. Yet I am a married man. Can I find in myself the desire for women other than my wife? Yes, I can. What is my response to that desire? To suppress it, to remove it and to pray to God for the strength to always resist it. You see, even if it could be said that I have a “heterosexual orientation” my expression of the desires within me is my choice.

      To take things a step further than my challenge, I think the nature of ethical debate is to try to make decisions about which choices are morally acceptable and which are not. Homosexual behavior is a moral choice and thus its acceptability can, and should, be debated.

      I am not entirely sure what to make of your second paragraph so I will refrain from comment. Perhaps you can clarify what you mean by “lack of understanding of sexuality as a whole?”

      1. Orientation in that certain people are orientated towards one sex, others are orientated towards the other, and some* don’t particularly mind either way. Would you say to someone “I am heterosexual” or “I do heterosexuality”? I suspect the former, our sexuality is part of our identity rather than our actions. It’s something we discover rather than something we choose. The same seems to be the case for women other than your wife, the desire is unwanted but there (I’m sure it’s not there Mrs.Cordray!), but you suppress it. I’m sure you’d rather be attracted only to your wife, but it’s not something you have any particular control over.

        But you seem to be talking about actions rather than orientation. If we’re talking about actions we’re talking more about healthy/unhealthy, or safe/unsafe sex. This is a health issue applying to all sexuality and as such sexuality is irrelevant.

        I can understand why in some cases the gay scene may be considered less safe. If you think back to when you were a young lad all filled with testosterone and horn, who didn’t wish women made themselves slightly more available? Now imagine this when both participants think the same thing.

        * Possibly most, if we’re to go by Oscar Wilde’s perceptive quote “People are neither hetero nor homo sexual, they’re simply sexual”.

  2. Firstly your “assumption” that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice rather than an inherent trait is erroneous. Virtually every species has been shown to have homosexual behaviour. Gay penguins are gay because they’re gay not because they enjoy watching the sound of music and buying cushions.

    Secondly this country has a legal system with a basis in the principle “that which is not expressly prohibited is permitted”. As long as all parties consent to any particular activity and their activity does not affect anyone else why should it be prohibited.

    Why does what is happening in the bedroom of the house next door to you affect you? How would the legal status of that relationship affect you? If you’re not affected keep your nose out.

    As to the health “issues” you claim. Smoking kills, alcohol kills, fatty foods kill, Skiing is a dangerous sport. Should these all be banned? If the effects are limited to the participants why should intervention be required? Many of the mental health issues are related to the bigoted behaviour of people who should be focusing on their own lives not the sex lives of others.

    1. My thoughts interspersed with yours:

      Firstly your “assumption” that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice rather than an inherent trait is erroneous. Virtually every species has been shown to have homosexual behaviour. Gay penguins are gay because they’re gay not because they enjoy watching the sound of music and buying cushions.

      My assumption is not erroneous for at least two reasons. First, your appeal to animals is not sufficient because no one knows why animals engage in homosexual behavior. In fact, scientists do not like to speak of “gay penguins” because they have no idea why the penguins do what they do. They are making inferences based upon observation. These inferences, much like yours, are driven not by data but by assumptions. You assume there is such a thing as a “gay penguin.” I do not follow this assumption. Second, even if it could be said that someone feels homosexual desires then there is still the choice to act on those desires. This makes homosexual behavior a choice. Are you suggesting that homosexual behavior is a compulsion?

      Secondly this country has a legal system with a basis in the principle “that which is not expressly prohibited is permitted”. As long as all parties consent to any particular activity and their activity does not affect anyone else why should it be prohibited.

      Why does what is happening in the bedroom of the house next door to you affect you? How would the legal status of that relationship affect you? If you’re not affected keep your nose out.

      Yet these things do affect me. I pay more for the increased healthcare costs associated with homosexual activity. My children could be exposed to teaching about the legitimacy of homosexual behavior in the classroom or through the media. As a minister for a church, there is a clear and present danger surrounding the government’s slow decline to the approval of homosexual behavior.

      Even when all parties consent to a behavior it can still be prohibited by the government. This is manifestly true in numerous examples such as smoking, drinking, incest and even underage sex. Can the government legislate about homosexual behavior? Yes, it certainly can. Do citizens have the right to insist that their government does legislate on such behavior? Yes, they most certainly do. Currently people are campaigning the UK government both in favor of and in opposition to homosexual behavior. Both of these campaigns are legitimate. What is not legitimate is to attempt to smear or suppress the opposing point of view.

      As to the health “issues” you claim. Smoking kills, alcohol kills, fatty foods kill, Skiing is a dangerous sport. Should these all be banned? If the effects are limited to the participants why should intervention be required? Many of the mental health issues are related to the bigoted behaviour of people who should be focusing on their own lives not the sex lives of others.

      Smoking is banned in public places, cigarettes have huge warning labels put on them, public drunkenness is still potentially a crime, alcohol consumption is measured and overuse is warned against. Fatty foods may or may not kill you; but have you been paying attention to the government’s attempts to help people eat less of them? Perhaps in these instances you can explain why the government already intervenes.

      Your final statement is dodging the facts. Aside from taking an opportunity to call me a bigot – which I am not – you are making an unsupported claim about the nature of mental health issues in order to attack my position. Support your claim first. Please provide some evidence which supports the thesis that mental health disorders in homosexuals are caused by the bigotry or negative views of other people.

      Mental health issues are not the only health issues to be considered. The other dangers to the health of people who engage in homosexual behavior are well documented.

      1. This is a strange article not to reveal nor reference its sources. As a survey done for Stonewall I question its accuracy as well as its independence.

        Of course, it is entirely possible, plausible even, that stigma from others contributes to the unhappiness of some people. Yet this may not be the only reason for the mental health problems associated with homosexual behavior. Indeed, given the Christian worldview, I would say that sin produces consequences.

  3. We, as Christians, have lost this battle as our salt lost its savor. And we know what happens to useless salt. Many Christians support these new notions in the name of “love.” We have allowed the spririt of the times to re-define Christian basics. Until pastors get off their duffs and begin actually equipping their flocks to address these issues with their friends and neighbors, the battle is lost. http://textsincontext.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/love-prayer-and-forgiveness-now-also-in-ebook-format/

  4. “In fact, scientists do not like to speak of “gay penguins” because they have no idea why the penguins do what they do. They are making inferences based upon observation. These inferences, much like yours, are driven not by data but by assumptions. You assume there is such a thing as a “gay penguin.””

    Where is the data that says christianity is true?

    We can conclude there are gay penguins when we see penguins of the same sex humping. You witnessed none of the events in the bible yet base your life around them being factual – surely this is a greater assumption?

    ” Second, even if it could be said that someone feels homosexual desires then there is still the choice to act on those desires. This makes homosexual behavior a choice.”

    Of course having homosexual relations is a choice, just in the same way having heterosexual relations is the choice. Having the sexual attraction is not a choice – it’s a natural desire. You didn’t choose to be attracted to woman, you just are, others didn’t choose to be attracted to those of the same sex…they just are. Nor does the fact it’s a choice change the fact that it’s a choice which doesn’t impact you in any way and has no rational reason for being classed as ‘immoral’ behaviour.

    “Yet these things do affect me. I pay more for the increased healthcare costs associated with homosexual activity. My children could be exposed to teaching about the legitimacy of homosexual behavior in the classroom or through the media. As a minister for a church, there is a clear and present danger surrounding the government’s slow decline to the approval of homosexual behavior.”

    That first part is just a staggering lie. As for your children being taught about the legitimacy of homosexual behaviour – this is just entirely circular. As a minister of a church and a public leader you should be more responsible and honest than to publicly declare “increased healthcare costs” as a way in which homosexual behaviour impacts you.

    ” Support your claim first. Please provide some evidence”

    The multitude of species in nature who engage in homosexual activity is evidence that homosexuality is a naturally occuring thing. Where is the evidence to suggest it isn’t?

    You refuse to accept this reality as evidence yet believe there was an arc built by a man called noah which contained all the animals in the world, 2 of every kind. Think about it…

    1. Again, I quote your response (which was decidedly disappointing, and then respond:

      Where is the data that says christianity is true?

      Try reading the Bible. Here Christianity is put forward as a religion with historic roots based on actual events. You doubt these things happened. fine. Please offer some evidence which says they did not actually occur as the Bible records them. I will make it easier for you. The Bible clearly says (in 1 Corinthians 15) that if Jesus has not been raised from the dead then Christianity is wrong. So there, then, is your challenge. Disprove the Resurrection of Christ.

      We can conclude there are gay penguins when we see penguins of the same sex humping. You witnessed none of the events in the bible yet base your life around them being factual – surely this is a greater assumption?

      You have not thought this through very well I think. Did I conclude my pet dogs were homosexual because they humped other dogs of the same gender? What was I to make of the aggressive chihuahua which humped the legs of people? What does this say about its sexuality? Rather than dealing with the actual reports and information from scientists you want to resort to crude characterizations of penguin behavior. Scientists do not understand why penguins – and other animals – do what they do.

      Of course having homosexual relations is a choice, just in the same way having heterosexual relations is the choice. Having the sexual attraction is not a choice – it’s a natural desire. You didn’t choose to be attracted to woman, you just are, others didn’t choose to be attracted to those of the same sex…they just are. Nor does the fact it’s a choice change the fact that it’s a choice which doesn’t impact you in any way and has no rational reason for being classed as ‘immoral’ behaviour.

      Homoexual attraction is a desire. I have never contradicted this fact. My point, all along, has been that having a desire does not mean that acting upon it is a good thing. In this instance, because of what the Bible teaches and because God alone is the source of moral truth, I have stated that acting on homosexual desires is wrong. Acting in an inappropriate way on heterosexual desires is also wrong.

      That first part is just a staggering lie. As for your children being taught about the legitimacy of homosexual behaviour – this is just entirely circular. As a minister of a church and a public leader you should be more responsible and honest than to publicly declare “increased healthcare costs” as a way in which homosexual behaviour impacts you.

      You accuse me of lying and yet provide no proof of this accusation. That is shameful. The reality is that I share the healthcare costs of the UK by paying into the funding of the NHS through my taxes. If someone’s moral choices cause them to be sick and require treatment then I am funding part of the cost for that treatment. There is no way around this fact. The more legitimate question is whether homosexual behavior causes someone to require more medical care or not. The answer is that it does. You can have a look at these links for evidence of this:


      The reality is that homosexual behavior can lead, directly, to an increase in all kinds of health problems. As a taxpayer, I share in the cost of treating these problems.

      Are children in schools taught that homosexual behavior is legitimate and good? Yes, they are! I work in schools every single week and have a good number of friends who are teachers. Have a look at the PSHE curriculum for England and you will find there much material which argues that homosexual behavior is right and is morally equivalent to heterosexual behavior. Surely you do not dispute this?

      So, as a matter of fact, both of the ways I cited in which homosexual behavior affects me are relevant and true. Do you still dispute this?

  5. Bench

    [i]Where is the data that says christianity is true?[/i]

    It clearly is laid out in Genesis that this is true. Right from the beginning. Written word is data too you know. Just not as you think of it as in every day sense of the matter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: